Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
we really do
why should we be embarrassed to tell our ISP we watch porn? i mean, not the privacy why should we tell our ISP anything aspect, but more the, so what if we do what difference does it make to anything ever
there needs to be some sort of filter i guess. its either this or banning it until 9pm.
years, you can literally turn on an adult filter on your router if you want.
and it can be used against you at a later date. Much like everything about the internet. Remember the whole XKeyscore database? And the NSA? And GCHQ? And Guantanamo Bay? And shipping prisoners - held without trial - to places where they are tourtured but it's ok as it's not on UK or US soil?
Couple this up with Google knowing everything about you. And Facebook not only knows about you but has face recognition on you and your friends? And your Android phone you're carrying about so google knows your call and location history? And Google buying Boston Cybornetics company last week.
LOOK MATE, IF YOU THINK THIS IS ABOUT HAVING A CRAFTY WANK WHILST THE MISSUS IS OUT THEN YOU'RE WRONG. IT'S ABOUT ROBOTS COMING TO KILL YOU IN 20 YEARS TIME BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT AND GOOGLE (WHO WILL MERGE) KNOW EVERYTHING ABOUT YOU.
IF YOU TOLERATE THIS, THEN YOUR CHILDREN WEAR V NECKS.
I stand by every word in this post.
though entirely predictable I guess.
Whole thing just seems a bit unnecessary I guess.
it's an unusual place
is meant to stop shit like this happening.
didn't seem that appropriate on Saturday.
But it seems fitting when replying to Brusma.
is one of my favourite MOs when drunk.
(Also when sober, to be tbf).
THE GOVERNMENT AND GOOGLE (WHO WILL MERGE)
with all these pieces falling into place, the robot army will be swamped by a frustrated horde of organics trying to absolutely rag their circuits off
It'll be the most embarrassing war in recorded history
Come under the categoric of pornography and it massively reduces the amount of information available and the opportunities for online support for people who are living with non-mainstream genders and sexualities. It's another form of discrimination and invalidation and it really sucks.
that they want access to porn.
and it's not their decision?
and the sex ed / family planning stuff too.
that they weren't going to be authoritarians like Labour? :')
not that it wasn't completely obvious the tories would pull some sort of shit like this. they're conservatives, not libertarians.
the lib dems deserve more scorn for straying so far from their alleged values.
it doesn't include watching dogs fuck
and why the hell was it filmed.
I'm looking forward to the opt-in system for going for a walk in the woods
that won't play well with the key demographics
Because I'm cool with that.
explaining exactly which site you want access to.
just how hard are they going to make this?
But I don’t see the big deal about this at all. I mean, at all.
Can someone explain why it is bad in a non hectoring manner? Also the tinfoil hat brigade can sit it out too.
is not that far away from the blocking of anything.
I am irritated by the fact that it looks like it's going to be implemented incredibly clumsily and shit off sex ed websites, sites with informations on alt sexualities as mentioned above. I doubt this'l even be done through prudishness as much as incompetence.
Vodafone had a similar block on my line when I first started with them - it wouldn't let me look up cocktail recipes ffs.
and it blocked loads of innocuous sites. i think including this one. and then they tried to sell me access to porn.
1. Siphon porn off into a specific commodity.
2. Porn tax.
i didn't say it wasn't a big deal. i just don't get why people won't admit to watching porn
the various non-porn related bits that folk will have to ask to be unblocked (see Dans' post above), and fidel's points about sex-ed sites, makes the whole thing shittier and potentially deeply discriminatory (and obv damaging)
or at least, it's so indiscriminate that it won't work effectively, or without considerable collateral damage in terms of sites barred.
So the issue is more about the fact it is being rolled out in a shit way and is too indescriminate, rather than the idea behind it?
Seems a fair enough complaint, carry on.
don't think it's anyone's business what people do on the internet unless it's illegal
it's not necessarily bad, just a completely worthless intrusion that seems to motivated entirely by prudishness. (not that I know anything about it) which is bad I guess.
what IS the point?
like, I don't think many people think that the current film classification is a horrific intrusion, or that letting children have totally unfettered access to whatever horrific pornography is really a good thing. But it's so borderline impossible to even imagine a system that wasn't a total disaster that it feels almost academic to separate philosophy from practicality here.
The principle itself riles me.
But that can happily be ignored if you want, cos marckee's point still stands as enough of a reason to decry this scheme.
is the inevitable result of a government that don't understand technology, people, and so have a desire to control both.
even aside from the government censorship angle it's the idea people are willing to let 3rd parties filter their internet usage because they're unable to figure out how to do it themselves.
It really is vital that people understand technology like this because tech issues like this are going to keep coming up and the lack of understanding is going to lead to more measure like this one. Not to mention the government's own reported suggested people would be against it.
that comes whenever government ministers try to understand / do something with the internet JFC
(or any other body part)
But impossible to answer. Because art (amongst other things).
this'd rile me a lot less if the divide was going to fall more on the side of allowing "art nudes" (snrk) and blocking only the more eyebrow-raising end of stuff.
Feel this is preeeeety unlikely, though.
it'd rile me a lot less if they err honest and went full Whitehouse, rather than dress it up in lies.
if they were up front about their stance and truly consistent in their approach they'd struggle to garner any support for their plans.
dress it up in some waaaaahmbulance shite, though, and it's good to go.
a parent to decide what their child can get access to and then take steps to filter out what they deem to be inappropriate, which they are capable of doing already, and it's not the Govt's place to tell adults that they have to ring and request the ability to view anything that is legal on the internet.
Ridiculous ill thought out policy.
i know it's always had a tricky legal status because we don't have the kind of freedom of speech guarantees that they cover it with in the US etc
my knowledge of this kinda stuff comes almost entirely from about 12-13 years ago when i used to read an anti-BBFC/anti-censorship website, but I know back then that anything showing various things (penetration and an erect penis being at least two of them) was likely to be refused a classification to be released on VHS/DVD, which made it as good as illegal as you can't sell things here without a BBFC rating.
but I don't really know if that has changed since then and how the internet figures into all of that.
so you could be done for anything with even moderate, consensual violence?
Pretty much not gonna start researching this at work obvs.
O -look my massive wang
fuck sake Wza
I've been attempting to research this. haven't got very far at all. it seems Cameron's plan is to make all porn depicting rape (both simulated and unsimulated) illegal. with a potential 3 year prison sentence.
seems as though other than that only 'life-threatening violence' is banned currently. I'm not sure if there's any plans to change this.
as established in DiS threads passim, boils down to trying to make fiction illegal.
it's (according to the BBC) 'Sites that show pornography, refer to illegal drugs or promote self-harm will all be blocked'
pretty fuzzy language
would prefer an opt in system rather than opt out I guess
even if completely negatively?
I can't really find out any detailed information, most articles seem to be really shitty and short and only mention porn
"not being a laughably shit parent", I guess
Susan? Can you make porn come on my telly please?
was wondering who would be first
if dad wants grot the household switch'll have to be flipped.
(in b4 kitchmo)
I was going to start a porn thread but it will have to wait until tomorrow
can anyone tell me if I can do this by email or if I have to speak to some call centre perv-enabler?
and you'd get pervs phoning you for the jazz channels every night at midnight (mainly the irish for some reason).
they'd always try and get away with "I'd like channel 821 please" but you'd have to say "sorry sir, I need the actual channel name"
*sigh* "amateur babes xxx please"
felt very cruel but funny.
husbands/boyfs trying to explain to their wives/girlfs why their PORNBLOCK has been unlocked. Awkward times.
with sounding out further reaching surveillance/censorship laws (although certainly that's part of the impulse) as it does with a Victorian brand of ethics this government likes to indulge in, where it turns the whole country away in order to pretend something's not happening to protect it from itself.
It surprises me how angry I am about it. Everything about it- how clumsy it is, the sheer nanny-statism of it, that the sheer nanny-statism of it comes from the party which spent a decade railing about the nanny state at every opportunity, the technophobia, that I've got to go cap-in-hand to Virgin (hurr hurr) to ask them to let me have grot, the intrinsic denial of human nature in favour of the cosily sexless nuclear family we all must aspire to it implies, the fact it is a clumsy and desperate stab at the Daily Mail demographic, the fact because it's mucky the opposition has done nothing to oppose it, the fact that not content with fucking us over every way they could think of the government's even had a go at taking the god-loving porn off the 18-35 bracket: Everything about it encapsulates what's wrong with our political system, and it just fucks me off mega-time. It's so goddamn pious and petty.
Now here's Jordan to say something like "No it's not", or KiK to say "Just ask your mum nicely, dunno why you're that bothered tbh tbf chief".
on the other hand it does save me from trying to work out how to block pron on our computer so the kids can use it.
they'll just end up with the dogfucking video that's being passed around whatsapp instead
that won't be my fault. I'll have done my bit (by NOT activating porn
my god... what have we done?
is our generation going to end up leaving their kids with access to non-horrific, non-rapey pornography in the same way some of our parents would let us and our friends drink / smoke weed at their houses so we weren't out on the streets being all at-risk and that?
Let's make it impossible for them to find sex education websites!
Deeply stupid, malicious policy from deeply stupid, malicious people.
is how we have to work hard to finally win against the Chinese
This added to the act that rather than applying for the sites themselves to be taken down copyright holders can now apply to have the sites blocked online, I for one welcome our new censorship loving overlords.
seems a bit off-message.
AM I RIGHT?
-"bathroom humour" (bye-bye fappable)
-"gruesome or frightening content" (bye-bye scary door)
-"sites that promote/facilitate interpersonal relationships - matchmaking, online dating..." (bye-bye DiS)
-"Sites that facilitate chat. Includes forums."
-"Sites that contain partial, not overtly sexual, nudity."
-"Sites concerning fashion, glamour..."
-"Sites that enable direct exchange of files between users."
-"iPlayer & Spotify."
Sounds remniscent of drug classifications, eh? "The Government have announced they've launched an inquiry into whether it ought to reclassify Spotify as a class B website..."
Although, perhaps none of this applies after all if you're not a nuclear family from the 50s: "The move, which allows PARENTS to enable blocking" ... "to suit “each individual FAMILY’s needs”"...
It's like the companies have thought *this is such a stupid idea, if we implement it shitly enough, it's the government who'll look stupid*.
but is it possible that this would help people who are addicted to porn? So like, the smoking ban was a bit shit, but if it's cut down smoking overall then maybe there's something to it?
The collateral damage to sex-ed and alt-sexuality sites is pretty unacceptable though.
because you just have to ask to have the block removed
So, say you're making a concerted effort to cut down and the block's up, you're that little bit less likely to think *oh, go on then, just a quick look at a pair of boobs/willy, sure it won't do any harm* then next thing you know you're wondering what happened to the last 6 hours.
It's like having to sign up for a site or pay for rude stuff on tv - not that difficult, but just enough of a barrier to think why bother.
Don't get me wrong, i still think it's stupid.
if you won't make a call / check a box on a web page to say you want porn, innit.
Otherwise you're saying that anyone who's ever given up drugs/smoking can't really have been addicted, because they could always just go out and get some more.
Fighting it, that is.
that 'promote interpersonal relationships' (whatever the fuck that is) are more offensive than websites that advocate physical violence towards humans
I just want to see my art sites
better than the odd non-smutty website being blocked, then if you have kids put your own firewall on and supervise them. This is bound to be shit, the papers will be full of normal websites which are blocked and porn websites that aren't, but that is always going to be the case. So many parents will think their kids are safe when they will be able to get around it very easily.
to wank yourselves into a coma, virgins!
yes, i would really not like my kids to learn about such filth as "contraception" and "respect for a partner". please block these things and also all the rude body parts of the world such as nipples. thank you.
government action/inaction, weird hang-ups about sexuality, understanding of technology, security vs secrecy...
haven't quite summarise it all adequately as a single thing yet, but i've a hunch there's a simple common thread (which probably covers the celeb/political paedo elite and tabloid paedogeddon, too).
enjoy your shitty, barely watchable streams there, plebs.
It's often my 'go to' source of mind-numbing grot.